PEACE OR WAR? The Next Five Years in Europe

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 300, 15 September 1936, Page 13

PEACE OR WAR? The Next Five Years in Europe

At the Liberal Summer School at Oxford recently Sir Walter Layton, the editor of “The Economist/ put forward the proposals of the Next Five Years Group for the European situation. The Next Five Years Group’s malp proposals are—- , 1. Germany should be invited to assume the responsioilities of League membership, on the basis of real and not merely formal equality. All members should sign the League Covenant anew. 2. A fact-finding commission before which nations should be asked to put all their facts and demands, with the understanding that if necessary we were prepared for a new treaty. 3. A non-aggression pact by all parties to the inquiry. 4. Universal obligation of signatories to the Covenant to apply economic and military sanctions in the event of a breach, except that in minor disputes military operations would be decided by geographical considerations. 5. All existing pacts should be absorbed into the wider undertaking. 6. Economic matters to be discussed. After reading these proposals Sir Walter said that the decision to join the League would be a difficult decision for Germany, because it would involve accepting third-party decisions. It would be useless to start on this programme unless we meant to move

away from economic nationalism, even to the extent of opening Empire markets, and possibly submitting all territories not self-governing to the mandates system. Also there must be limitation of armaments, and if Germany did not agree the other Powers piust go ahead on the same programme. If that turned out to be encirclement, the choice would be Germany’s. At least we should have offered Germany a fair deal. The Popular Front. Sir Walter Layton went on to link these proposals with the idea of a Popular Front. The Peace Ballot had had a great success. It was a great thing, and it had come to stay as part of democratic technique that there should be public opinion independent of party ties to dictate to Governments the general course which it wanted; but that was not enough, especially when it was pressing a Government many of whose members did not believe in the policy they were asked to adopt.

The Popular Front did not involve the surrender of any ultimate ideas, not even Communism. It had a dominating common objective. The Government had shown itself extremely squeezable, and if the Popular Front came into being within the next two or three months and won one or two by-elections that would change the

policy of the Government within four months. “I am not interested at the moment,” said Sir Walter Layton, “in the next election. I am interested in what is going to happen at Geneva in the next few months and in whether we are going to have a war." As the result of the Abyssinian crisis British prestige had sunk lower 1 than he had ever known it before. “The whole British idea is discredited, and people are turning away from freedom and democratic ideals toward dictatorship.’’ If Britain Turned Pacifist. Sir Walter Layton examined what he believed would be the consequences if this country became pacifist. Unless the United States were prepared to take Australia it would be taken by Japan. Canada might remain independent, but certainly federated to the United States. South Africa would disintegrate and he would not like to forecast th© details. Egypt and the Sudan would go to Italy or Germany. This overpopulated island would at the least have to face a fall in its standard of life. It was true Norway and Sweden had a good standard of living without an empire, but they had enjoyed the advantages of the state of affairs created by British Free Trade. There would be war between Russia and Germany and civil war in Central Europe. Some people thought there would be that in any case, and that

the Spanish revolt was the precursor. Certainly there would be if democracy had nothing to say. If Germany won, this country’s experiment in the relations between the white and coloured people would have a terrible setback. These things would also be the result of Baldwinism and weakness. Sir Walter pointed out the danger of paying to Germany the “blackmail” of colonies. Poland was demanding colonies also. The British Empire was not big enough to satisfy all who would claim a share. This country did not fight for this or that frontier—the' people did not know where such frontiers were. They did not fight for what they thought to be a million or a hundred million pounds’ worth of Britain’s interests. They fought for moral issues. We ought to make it crystal clear who were our friends, and that we were going to help them with all our political and economic influence to help themselves. The countries we ought to help were those who were going along the same lines as ourselves —for instance, France. We wanted France to get through her social and economic crisis safely. We should go at once and say we were ready to help; and we ought to have a definite policy in regard to* Spain, even if it were only the nega-* tive one that there must be no interference by Fascist Powers. If a Fascist regime were established in Spain the western end of the Mediterranean was shut as well as the eastern.